When it comes to static vs dynamic typing, “I’ve heard a million arguments from both sides throughout my career,” Hansson wrote on his blog today“but found very few of them to convince anyone of anything.”
But wait — he thinks we can all get along:
Personally, I’m an unashamedly on-the-go type of guy. That’s why I love Ruby so much. It takes full advantage of dynamic typing to allow for poetic syntax that results in beautiful code. To me, Ruby with explicit, static typing would be like a salad with a scoop of ice cream. They just don’t get along.
I’ll also admit that I’ve taken an evangelical position for dynamic typing in the past. To the point of suffering from a One True Proposition affliction. A lack of enthusiasm for dynamic typing is seen as a reflection of missing education, experience, or perhaps even skill.
Oh what stupidity. Like trying to convince an introvert that they’d really like parties if they just loosened up a bit…
Hansson also sees “the greatness of multiplicity” in positions about functional vs object-oriented programming. “The poles on both these axes have shown to deliver great software over the decades (and terrible things too!).”